On Monday 08 March 2010 14:06:04 Vivek Khurana wrote: > On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 12:56 PM, jtd <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Monday 08 March 2010 10:21:28 Vivek Khurana wrote: > >> On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 9:11 AM, Linux Lingam > >> <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > <huge snip> > > > The closed companies are entrenched because they have a head > > start of 10 to 25 years. Many large companies had begun their > > operations selling calculators made by DCM and Superior > > electronics. Consequently a FLOSS company will have to cook it's > > books and indulge in several other unsavoury practices to > > commercially qualify for most of the government tenders. > > You are mixing two disjoint sets.
I am. But deliberately. Because FLOSS users are affected by M$isms all the while. Which is closely tied in to procurement policies. Also... > I am not talking of government > contracts. The OP was talking about the difficulties in adoption of > FOSS and lack of trained professionals, with special emphasis on > graphics/design processes. ...this thread is specifically about a WB ministry trying to use FLOSS. Not just a reply to Niyam's (excellent) more general response > To which I am proposing a solution that > make a software that cuts the learning time, instead of matching > the learning time and empower users to do more with FOSS when > compared with closed solution. At least as far as audio processing goes, the learning curve is just the same as other tools. You can do far more already. The problem is that the user has not learnt the principles of sound and video engineering but merely the ability to handle certain tools. Having once invested his time and money in learning one set of tools, he is most reluctant to do so again. This is the same with lets say a Roland mixer (v/s some other), or a Nakamichi deck or any of gadgets that we use. Useability and training go hand in hand I must also add that the more complex features available in FLOSS come about by understanding many smaller tools and making them work for you. So Is there a tool which does everything for audio processing? NO Is there a tool which imitates xyz? Maybe to a limited extent. BUT Are there TOOLS which can do everything that I want them to, the way I want? YES once i learn how to use them. Quite frankly I havent once been stuck for want of a FLOSS solution. In comparison I have been stuck numerous times while working with closed systems. > As I quoted MySQL, Firefox and > Google chrome as examples of software that did more than closed > sourced solutions, had shorter learning curve, at the same time > proved to be more secure and stable than closed source > alternatives. I disagree in the sense that these were a limited specific subset of cases > As for procurement, the policy can be flexed if the people at very > top are ready to accept the change. The examples you have given > about the procurement policy, are the default failsafe conditions > accepted by the auditors and designed to provide advantage to > corporates of specific size. True. Unfortunately they area hindrance to FLOSS. > This can be changed, but I am least > concerned about government offices. Looking at the total user base > of computers, government users are a tiny fraction. When people > outside government are using FOSS for day to day activities, > government's mentality can be changed. Oh well we are discussing chicken and egg ;-) > > regards > Vivek > > -- > The hidden harmony is better than the obvious!! > _______________________________________________ > network mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.fosscom.in/listinfo.cgi/network-fosscom.in -- Rgds JTD _______________________________________________ network mailing list [email protected] http://lists.fosscom.in/listinfo.cgi/network-fosscom.in
